At present rate, all oil will be consumed within the next 3-5 decades.

If all personal transport doubles their mpg, to 50-60 mpg, then the oil "parasite" might survive several, extra, years.
Personal transport uses less than 1/2 the oil consumed.
The majority is used by sea, air and land, material and product delivery.
Combine this with mass transit.
Add materials production.
And, of course, power generation.
Doubling all personal vehicle mpg, might extend oil dependency by 20%, (another decade)?

The best oil conservation methods are merely prolonging the misery.

Electric vehicles seem to be the best foreseeable "treatment" towards curing this oil addiction.

Last edited by DrkAngel on Apr 23, 2011 11:21 pm, edited 3 times in total.

A little learning is a dangerous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
There, shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely, sobers us again.

Scary thing is from the United States point of view is that we are actually consuming less gasoline now than last year and the prices are still rising! WTF?! That means it is supply driven or speculative in nature.

.. or China is guzzling the stuff at increasing rates + OPEC doesn't feel like increasing production, so they just charge more for the stuff, thus prolonging their wealth... as they really have nothing else to sell..

I am sure speculation has something to do with it.
But our dollar is also falling in value pretty bad, so that buys less oil.

So many factors. The only way out of this nightmare is to use it all.
Oh, then we get to deal with another nightmare ( everyone is a farmer ).. bummer

Electric vehicles seem to be the best foreseeable "treatment" towards curing this oil addiction.

To be honest I think we should be very grateful for the things oil has given us over the years. Sure, there's been ocean spills and pollution but there's also been lower food prices, faster commuting, electricity grids and the list goes on.

Yes it's going to run out but it's just the end of a party, we're not being put out of any misery. Nuke plants alone will keep us going for centuries. I'm sure we'll find a way to shoot the excretion out into the sun with a bit of research.

LegendLength wrote:
Yes it's going to run out but it's just the end of a party, we're not being put out of any misery. Nuke plants alone will keep us going for centuries. I'm sure we'll find a way to shoot the excretion out into the sun with a bit of research.

The US has 104 nuclear plants, which produce 20% of our electricity. Sadly, most all, are at least 30 years old. 4 more are approved but will not come "on line" for, almost, another decade.

Alternately, China has 26 plants under construction, with another 28 approved. Coming "on-line" at a rate of more than 5 per year.

The new Generation IV design has the improvement of totally self-contained cooling. This fourth-generation reactor will make cooling totally independent of external power sources, making it much safer.

"The Rongcheng plant will use helium, an inert gas, in its cooling system, and reactor cores will be able to withstand temperatures exceeding 1,600 degrees Celsius (2,912 degrees Fahrenheit) for several hundred hours without melting down, ..." (China)

GE, in conjunction with China, is mass producing, modular component nuclear plants. Great advantages are, standardization, mass production, familiar design and assembly, operation etc. Plants are anticipated to come "on line" in less than 1/2 the time that the US has ever achieved. (Highlighted on the PBS "NOVA" program. I don't recall the episode title.)

The US has a sad history of building, individually designed, hand built plants, requiring extreme, cost, time, and re-designing, during construction.

Last edited by DrkAngel on Apr 17, 2012 7:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

A little learning is a dangerous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
There, shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely, sobers us again.

As far as the oil, electric won't cut it for flying cargo all over the globe. It could take care of 90% of commuters needs - me included . And, Why do we need nuclear in the US.? We have enough geothermal in the west to power the whole country. Can it cost that much more to develop than nukes??

Dave When I die I want to slide in sideways yelling WooHoo what a ride !

DrkAngel wrote:The US has 104 nuclear plants, which produce 20% of our electricity. Sadly, most all, are at least 30 years old. 4 more are approved but will not come "on line" for, almost, another decade.

I'm guessing a lot of those are for medical research only though. Why are there so many compared to china? Technology?

torker wrote:As far as the oil, electric won't cut it for flying cargo all over the globe.

Yes air transport is a problem. Although one option may be smaller, lighter planes that don't carry so much.

I actually did a bit of research into electric flight before getting into ebikes just out of interest, and level flight for say a hang glider (with load) only takes 4 - 5 kW at mundane speeds (i.e. 40 mph). I predict there's going to be some unexpected changes in paradigm for flight in the next half century due to electric + solar.

torker wrote:Why do we need nuclear in the US.? We have enough geothermal in the west to power the whole country. Can it cost that much more to develop than nukes??

Hmm if it's cheap enough it would be a great thing but you'd think environmentalists would be touting it no?

ViBiker - "On the bright side ... most of our (USA) oil money is now going to Canada & Mexico ...
How is that good?
Soon, the poorest people will be sneaking across the borders into Canada and Mexico.
Getting higher paying jobs, and sending money back to their starving families in the US.
Getting some of our money back!"

A little learning is a dangerous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
There, shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely, sobers us again.

It's good cause those countries are your friendly neighbours, and you aren't as likely to start a war with them. Anything in the Persian Gulf, on the other hand...

Nuclear is certainly an option that already nuclear-capable countries should maintain. The old reactors are a problem though. Here in Australia we have more sunshine and wind than we know what to do with, but still don't harness it like we could. Coal is king here, and will be for the next 400 years, unfortunately. The biggest opponent to nuclear in Australia is the coal industry

Lots of people don't realize the real energy guzzler is heating homes, buisnesses and factories. Compared to that, transportation energy use is very small. Yet we continue to build to R11. Duuuh. Nevertheless, it still helps to not drive more car than you need, or a car at all if you don't need a car.

DrkAngel wrote:ViBiker - "On the bright side ... most of our (USA) oil money is now going to Canada & Mexico ...
How is that good?
Soon, the poorest people will be sneaking across the borders into Canada and Mexico.
Getting higher paying jobs, and sending money back to their starving families in the US.
Getting some of our money back!"

With Canada's recently available oil and gas reserves, they now have the potential to accelerate global warming!
Why would they do this?

When oil does "dry up" the only remaining "world commodities" will be food and fresh water.
Canada, if they wisely manage their accumulated oil wealth, will barricade their borders, to block out those USA, illegal immigrant scum, trying to steal their Canadian jobs.
Global warming will transform the vast frozen Canadian wastelands into virgin fruitful croplands, the new breadbasket, for the world.
As long as they have to build a wall to keep out that American immigrant scum, they will probably wall off the Great Lakes, keeping all that fresh water, to sell on the world market. Letting the USA dry up, as the desert regions grow North!

Mexico will also have to block the immigrant scum, for as the Mexican deserts shift northward, the temperate-tropical regions will also shift northward into Mexico, turning it into a tropical paradise. Too good for the "Gringo" bendajos! Being the worlds #1 consumers of petroleum, for the last century ... they brought this upon themselves ... and ... they were stupid enough to finance this "global climate modification"!!!

A little learning is a dangerous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
There, shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely, sobers us again.

or:
B. Live with the problem
. 1. Evacuate population from flooding regions
... a . Antarctic-Arctic melt will raise sea-level substantially
There is an estimated 100 meter sea-level rise, when combined with permafrost melt
(click on picture, for large map)
. 2. Evacuate population from newly formed desert areas
... a . The non-flooded areas of the USA will become increasingly arid, prompting massive migration towards temperate Canada and tropical Mexico
... b . 1/2 of Europe gone and Russia will be almost completely submerged, Cuba, Ireland - gone ... along with many other countries and Island chains, forcing migration towards the newly-tropical Northern Africa. The Middle-East will most likely be transformed into a temperate, to tropical, paradise.
Strangely? Every major oil exporting country looks to benefit from global warming - except possibly England. (they will be about 80% submerged)

Almost the entire US Eastern seaboard will be gone, one notable exception might be Manhattan Island. They do have plans for massive dikes.

Note: New regions of land will be made habitable!
Greenland & Antarctica might become safe havens for refugee populations.
150-200 million displaced from eastern & southern USA!
In fact, while reducing it's presence, everywhere else, the US military presence is increasing, in Greenland!

Attachments

100ms.JPG (7.51 KiB) Viewed 4000 times

Last edited by DrkAngel on Jan 10, 2012 3:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

A little learning is a dangerous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
There, shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely, sobers us again.

Is this from the HAARP projects the world has going on ?? Saw a documentary on it, yesterday. They can change the regions of the world they choose, to make it better or worse. Rainy to desert, hot to cold. Create earthquakes and other stormy weather. They are manipulating the Jet Stream as they wish. US Govt, has, I believe, 3 in Alaska, and more in the rest of the US of A. Russia has them, and many other countries as well.

Harold in CR wrote:Is this from the HAARP projects the world has going on ?? Saw a documentary on it, yesterday. They can change the regions of the world they choose, to make it better or worse. Rainy to desert, hot to cold. Create earthquakes and other stormy weather. They are manipulating the Jet Stream as they wish. US Govt, has, I believe, 3 in Alaska, and more in the rest of the US of A. Russia has them, and many other countries as well.

Even if you burnt "oil" (turbine generator), to make electricity, to run eVehicles, you would be using less oil!
EBikes-eVehicles typically run at 80-90% efficiency.
Internal Combustion Engines (ICE) typically run at 15% efficiency!
A 150CC would be a 2-cycle engine ... so efficiency might be ... 10%, or less.

MPGe, or eMPG, is a comparison of electric to gas, using cost as the basis.

Oh! And it is profitable, not expensive, to recycle most EV batteries.
Recyclers are paying $.28/lb for lead batteries.
Lithium types contain valuable Cobalt & Lithium.

As for exercise, with an eBike, you can pedal assist, as little, or as much ... as you want ...

Let the gas guzzlers pay for the roads!
They are the ones ruining our economy!
Sending a Billion dollars a day out of the country, to buy imported oil.
That would be $10 per day per family = $3650 a year for each American family, sucked away from the American economy!

ViBiker wrote:On the bright side ... most of our oil money is now going to Canada & Mexico ...
How is that good?
Soon, the poorest people will be sneaking across the borders into Canada and Mexico.
Getting higher paying jobs, and sending money back to their starving families in the US.
Getting some of our money back!

ViBiker wrote:With Canada's recently available oil and gas reserves, they now have the potential to accelerate global warming!
Why would they do this?

When oil does "dry up" the only remaining "world commodities" will be food and fresh water.
Canada, if they wisely manage their accumulated oil wealth, will barricade their borders, to block out those USA, illegal immigrant scum, trying to steal their Canadian jobs.
Global warming will transform the vast frozen Canadian wastelands into virgin fruitful croplands, the new breadbasket, for the world.
As long as they have to build a wall to keep out that American immigrant scum, they will probably wall off the Great Lakes, keeping all that fresh water, to sell on the world market. Letting the USA dry up, as the desert regions grow North!

Mexico will also have to block the immigrant scum, for as the Mexican deserts shift northward, the temperate-tropical regions will also shift northward into Mexico, turning it into a tropical paradise. Too good for the "Gringo" bendajos! Being the worlds #1 consumers of petroleum, for the last century ... they brought this upon themselves ... and ... they were stupid enough to finance this "global climate modification"!!!

or:
B. Live with the problem
. 1. Evacuate population from flooding regions
... a . Antarctic-Arctic melt will raise sea-level substantially
There is an estimated 100 meter sea-level rise, when combined with permafrost melt
(click on picture, for large map)

. 2. Evacuate population from newly formed desert areas
... a . The non-flooded areas of the USA will become increasingly arid, prompting massive migration towards temperate Canada and tropical Mexico
... b . 1/2 of Europe gone and Russia will be almost completely submerged, Cuba, Ireland - gone ... along with many other countries and Island chains, forcing migration towards the newly-tropical Northern Africa. The Middle-East will most likely be transformed into a temperate, to tropical, paradise.
Strangely? Every major oil exporting country looks to benefit from global warming - except possibly England. (they will be about 80% submerged)

Almost the entire US Eastern seaboard will be gone, one notable exception might be Manhattan Island. They do have plans for massive dikes.

Note: New regions of land will be made habitable!
Greenland & Antarctica might become safe havens for populations.
150-200 million displaced from eastern & southern USA!
In fact, while reducing it's presence, everywhere else, the US military presence is increasing, in Greenland!

Global Warming - Climate Modification
Sadly ... these "facts" are reasonably verifiable.
And ... "Global Warming" is accelerating!
As the Icecaps melt, the darker ocean, and land, adsorb more heat, causing more melt, less sunlight is reflected away.
The only thing I should be considered "guilty of" is failing to note, a projected timeline ... which is unknown, due to the uncertainty as to the continued acceleration!

A little learning is a dangerous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
There, shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely, sobers us again.

Most scientists have dropped the "Warming" argument and accepted the "Climate Change" version agreeing that the planet is more likely to experience an ice age than a melt down.
But whatever the individual beliefs, why do you keep stirring this up in the EV section ??
I Suggest the mods retire this thread to the OTD section !

Hillhater wrote: why do you keep stirring this up in the EV section ??

The major justifiable reason for EV's, is to combat oil use and it's "side effects"(global warming, massive imbalance of trade, pollution, etc).
It isn't economically advantageous, for the individual ... yet!

Last edited by DrkAngel on Jan 24, 2012 6:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

A little learning is a dangerous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
There, shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely, sobers us again.

While Arctic and Antarctic ice is melting at an accelerating rate, the majority of this ice is on water ... floating. If it melts, it will not raise sea level ... at all!

If the arctic poles, were to totally melt there would be a 300'+ sea level rise.
Antarctica alone, is covered by 7 million cubic miles of ice and would raise sea level by 200'.
Greenland contributes the majority of the remaining ice, for sea level increase.
The remainder being supplied by various smaller islands, glaciers, permafrost etc.

Fortunately ... the majority of this ice exists on land that is subject to temperatures that average about 60 degrees below the melting point.
Which means that ... a global sea rise, of more than 40' (13 meters), could only be affected by a horrific increase in global temperature.
Present predictions are for less than a foot per decade.

Last edited by DrkAngel on Jan 13, 2012 9:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

A little learning is a dangerous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
There, shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely, sobers us again.

Kmowing the way these discussions go, i suspect that any reference put forward would be argued as invalid for one reason or another. ! ..so, no...i will just leave it as a statement and let you worry over its validity

Hillhater wrote:Kmowing the way these discussions go, i suspect that any reference put forward would be argued as invalid for one reason or another. ! ..so, no...i will just leave it as a statement and let you worry over its validity

Well played, and your answer shows your wisdom, if not in climate science, at least in human interactions

I haven't paid much attention to climate science for a couple of years, so I wasn't trying to be confrontational (okay, maybe a little ); I was actually prepared to listen if there was any truth in scientists now saying ice age instead of general warming.

Just to be clear though, to me the question of 'valid' is a no-brainer. We're talking about scientific questions, so valid means peer-reviewed publications (with conflicts of interest disclosed), or at least some kind of article referring back to them.

The point of the Climate Modification "story" and the subsequent "Punchline", besides being proof of an active imagination,
is that, ridiculously wrong conclusions can be validly reached from data, by ignoring or neglecting "unwanted" or seeming irrelevant componants.
All the "facts" in the "story" are true, conclusions, though logical, fail miserably due to 1 neglected factor ...
the land under portions of the ice caps!

Last edited by DrkAngel on Nov 03, 2012 7:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

A little learning is a dangerous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
There, shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely, sobers us again.